Issues : Long accents
|
b. 76
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
The long accent over the minim b flat1 in A was written as a short one in GE. In FE it was placed under the note. In EE the accent is absent, as it was interpreted as category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 90
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
The long accent of A was read in GE (→FE→EE) as hairpins category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 91
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
A long accent of A was read in GE1 (→FE→EE, →GE2) as a short one. In GE3, the accent was ascribed to the chord on the 2nd crotchet of the left hand. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , GE revisions |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 92
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
It is not clear what type of accent was used in A; it collides with the indication cresc., which makes it difficult to determine its shape. We consider a long accent to be more probable (cf. signs in the neighbouring bars). Omission of the accent mark in GE1 (→FE→EE) is definitely an error. The accent was put back in GE2 (→GE3), yet ascribing it to the L.H. chord seems unfortunate. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Errors in GE , GE revisions |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 93
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
A long accent in A was reproduced in GE (→FE→EE) as a short one. in GE2 (→GE3) the mark is clearly written for the left hand part, which does not follow from the notation of A. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , GE revisions |
hairpins complementing the 
hairpins from bar 
